The law firm Perkins Coie has initiated legal action against the Trump administration, claiming that a recent executive order targeting the firm violates constitutional rights and is an act of retribution for representing clients and causes opposing the administration.
Last week, President Trump enacted the executive order titled “Addressing Risks from Perkins Coie LLP,” making accusations of “dishonest and dangerous activity” aimed at undermining laws and elections. The order also alleges that the firm “racially discriminates against its own attorneys and staff” with its diversity and equity initiatives.
In a lawsuit filed Tuesday in federal court in Washington, D.C., Perkins Coie’s lawyers have described the executive order as “an affront to the Constitution and our adversarial system of justice.”
The lawsuit states, “Its plain purpose is to bully those who advocate points of view that the President perceives as adverse to the views of his Administration, whether those views are presented on behalf of paying or pro bono clients.”
According to the firm, Trump’s executive order threatens its capacity to effectively represent its clients and operate as a legitimate business. The suit seeks to have the order invalidated and to prevent its enforcement.
The Justice Department has not yet replied to requests for comment regarding the lawsuit.
Trump’s executive order accused Perkins Coie of a series of actions over the years that allegedly sought to compromise the integrity of democratic elections and the U.S. judicial system.
The order specifically references the firm’s representation of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign and the involvement of its attorneys in the development of a dossier full of unverified claims about potential connections between Trump and Russia.
The lawsuit rejects all allegations of misconduct, highlighting that Trump filed a lawsuit in 2022 against Perkins Coie, Clinton, and others, alleging a conspiracy against him, a case that was dismissed by a federal court shortly thereafter.
Furthermore, it points out that the attorneys who led Perkins Coie’s work for the Clinton campaign no longer serve at the firm. One of them, Michael Sussmann, faced charges related to the dossier but was acquitted by a jury.
The executive order also accuses Perkins Coie of racial discrimination based on its diversity policies.
The lawsuit denies this claim, asserting that Perkins Coie is dedicated to diversity and inclusion without discriminating against its attorneys or employees based on race or other factors.
Perkins Coie’s attorneys argue that the executive order is unconstitutional on multiple grounds, citing violations of the First, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments.
